|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [xj-s] Re: V-12 swap for XJ6. Is this crazy?
> >Series 3 and the X300, as the XJ40 engine bay was too narrow. This was > >reportedly to stop British Leyland from fitting the Rover V8 into the > XJ40 > >in place of the AJ6. > Ah, yes! Jaguar was clever and aware and insightful enough to do this, but not clever and aware and insightful enough to clear up the design of the centrifigal advance. Too bad they didn't drop in the Rover (Buick) V8; then it would have been a lot easier to lump these things. John References:
|
|
Improve your Jag-lovers experience with the Mozilla FireFox Browser!
View the latest posts from our Forums via an RSS Feed! ©Jag-loversTM Ltd / JagWEBTM 1993 - 2024 All rights reserved. Jag-lovers is supported by JagWEBTM For Terms of Use and General Rules see our Disclaimer Use of the Jag-lovers logo or trademark name on sites other than Jag-lovers itself in a manner implying endorsement of commercial activities whatsoever is prohibited. Sections of this Web Site may publish members and visitors comments, opinion and photographs/images - Jag-lovers Ltd does not assume or have any responsibility or any liability for members comments or opinions, nor does it claim ownership or copyright of any material that belongs to the original poster including images. The word 'Jaguar' and the leaping cat device, whether used separately or in combination, are registered trademarks and are the property of Jaguar Cars, England. Some images may also be © Jaguar Cars. Mirroring or downloading of this site or the publication of material or any extracts therefrom in original or altered form from these pages onto other sites (including reproduction by any other Jaguar enthusiast sites) without express permission violates Jag-lovers Ltd copyright and is prohibited |